Thread: SCO and Wastrel

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    8,046
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    SCO and Wastrel

    Just saw this:

    Wastrel: As if they couldn't possbily know what they were talking about. I'm thinking of the Dochter thread with the Bayesian stats references.
    ...
    SCO: If Dochter interpreted it that way, I apologize. He knew what he was writing in that comment. Because of his previous mentioning of Baysian in response of "a priori" I did not think he could assume I think otherwise.
    Just for unnecessary clarity, I certainly didn't interpret any of what SCO said as condescending, in fact he was referencing what I had put in as a footnote (re: Bayes), on the other points he pointed out a pretty dire writing slip-up. What I did realize was that he knew a hell of a lot more on the topics at hand than I did. This is great by me as I have primarily a cookie cutter understanding of stats and the philosophy of science and could only give a generally correct definition. This limited knowledge was well demonstrated in my long-winded, irrelevant and not entirely correct post on effect size and sample size in ronin's "test to be conducted" thread (I really should reread that drivel and do a rewrite but I'm probably the only one that cares).

    But hell I'm only a grad student; I'm really just starting.


    Because Iím an immature 26:
    ...can we hold hands now, I've had a few bjj classes?


    For some reason I'm expecting justme on this thread anytime now.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    2,667
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yes... you rubbed the lamp?

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    20,890
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    He is like a crab, hanging on to the skin of your balls !!!!!!
    Last edited by Ronin; 12/04/2003 3:16pm at .

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    2,667
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    That dingelberries sir....Damn Canadians, they have so much trouble with anatomy.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    CST
    Posts
    511
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Dochter,
    though classifying myself as perverted by almost anyone else's standards, I have to say I quite enjoyed that thread, my motivation was to point out something that might be helpful for you some time or another and I didn't think you misinterpreted it. I precautiously apologized anyway when it seemed Wastrel or maybe someone else as well (if anybody else read the stuff anyway) might have misunderstood something. Didn't cost me anything.

  6. #6
    Such as thou art, sometime was I. supporting member
    The Wastrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    9,620
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I misread him. My fault.
    Normally, I'd say I was grappling, but I was taking down and mounting people, and JFS has kindly informed us that takedowns and being mounted are neither grappling nor anti grappling, so I'm not sure what the **** I was doing. Maybe schroedinger's sparring, where it's neither grappling nor anti-grappling until somoene observes it and collapses the waveform, and then I RNC a cat to death.----fatherdog

  7. #7
    Such as thou art, sometime was I. supporting member
    The Wastrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    9,620
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Woops...I was mostly offended by the "gotta love a monocausal argument" thing.
    Normally, I'd say I was grappling, but I was taking down and mounting people, and JFS has kindly informed us that takedowns and being mounted are neither grappling nor anti grappling, so I'm not sure what the **** I was doing. Maybe schroedinger's sparring, where it's neither grappling nor anti-grappling until somoene observes it and collapses the waveform, and then I RNC a cat to death.----fatherdog

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    8,046
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Originally posted by SCO
    Dochter,
    though classifying myself as perverted by almost anyone else's standards, I have to say I quite enjoyed that thread, my motivation was to point out something that might be helpful for you some time or another and I didn't think you misinterpreted it.
    I'm actually developing quite an interest in philosophy of science as a side effect of my advisor's method of teaching experimental design and so also find that sort of thing quite interesting.

    Guess we're both dorks, and of course that was exactly how I took it.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    CST
    Posts
    511
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Guess we're both dorks, and of course that was exactly how I took it.
    Don't say that, I'm getting real depressed now. Maybe if I try real hard I can still come across like a legitimate blockhead.
    Woops...I was mostly offended by the "gotta love a monocausal argument" thing.
    Ok dude, I know I can't afford to, however can't help it, so I apologize for the brusque wording anyway.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    8,046
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    "Don't say that, I'm getting real depressed now. Maybe if I try real hard I can still come across like a legitimate blockhead."

    I have perfected the art of usually appearing as such, and then shredding the arguments of people who converse with me in like manner. It provides feeble and shallow sustenance for a feeble and shallow ego :D

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO